Political Liberty is defined, the Right of assenting to or
dissenting from every Public Act by which a Man is to be
bound. Hence, the perfect Enjoyment of it presupposes a
Society in which unanimous Consent is required to every
public Act. It is less perfect where the Majority governs.
Still less where the Power is in a representative Body. Still
less where either the executive or judicial is not elected.
Still less where only the legislative is elected. Still less
where a Part of the Representatives can decide. Still less
where such Part is not a Majority of the whole. Still less
where the Decisions of such Majority may be delayed or
overruled. Thus the Shades grow weaker and weaker, till
no Trace remains. But is it not destroyed by the first Restriction?

In England, a Majority of Citizens does not elect the Majority
of Representatives. A certain Part of those Representatives
being met, a Majority of them can bind the Electors.
The Decisions of these Representatives are confined
to the legislative Department. And the Dissent of the
Lords or of the King sets aside what the Commons had
determined. The Englishman therefore does not, in any
Degree, possess the Right of dissenting from Acts by which
he is affected, so far as those Acts relate to the Executive
or judicial Departments. And in Respect to the legislative,
his political Liberty consists in the Chance that certain Persons
will not consent to Acts which he would not have approved.
And is that a Right which, depending on a Complication
of Chances, gives one thousand against him for
one in his favor? Right is not only independent of, but
excludes the Idea of Chance.